On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 01:16:29PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Wed, 21 Oct 2009, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > > To me, it seems that the problem is that we're approaching this > > backwards.... > > This is, of course, correct. But the infrastructure for the higher > layers to signal us isn't in place yet. I was wondering if in the > meantime, we could implement a stopgap approach that wouldn't be 100% > right but would be better than nothing. > > Or should I just forget about it and work on implementing support for > the new runtime PM framework in both USB and SCSI? As my father would say, "Do you want to do this twice, or just once?" Any stopgap will be (a) full of problems, and (b) need to be replaced with the final solution. How about we jump straight to (b) and get it over with? I, for one, really don't want to deal with issues arising from a stopgap, when we all know what the "right" answer is. Matt -- Matthew Dharm Home: mdharm-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Maintainer, Linux USB Mass Storage Driver Type "format c:" That should fix everything. -- Greg User Friendly, 12/18/1997
Attachment:
pgpMIpXbbyCjL.pgp
Description: PGP signature
